This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

We have met 'no centrally dictated closures' pledge, claims Government

The coalition Government has claimed it is meeting its pledge to stop ‘centrally dictated closures’ of A&E and maternity wards despite the likely closure of Lewisham A&E in the face of opposition from the local CCG and the local population.

In a detailed appendix to the coalition’s mid-term review published yesterday, it claimed that it achieved this through measures outlined in the Operating Framework for 2010/11.

The framework stated that future reconfiguration proposals had to demonstrate: support from GP commissioners; strengthened public and patient engagement; clarity on the clinical evidence base; and consistency with current and prospective patient choice.

But this week a trust special administrator appointed to oversee the reconfiguration of the failing South London NHS Healthcare Trust his recommended the closure of Lewisham A&E despite fierce opposition from the local CCG.

Meanwhile, a public petition against the changes has reached over 25,000 signatures. Health secretary Jeremy Hunt will make the final decision about the trust on 1 February.

The Government’s pledge to ‘stop the centrally dictated closure of A&E and maternity wards, so that people have better access to local services’ was made in the coalition agreement published in May 2010.

Dr Louise Irvine, a GP in Lewisham, east London, and a BMA Council member, said it was 'absolutely' a centrally-dictated closure for Lewisham A&E and maternity services.

She said: 'There is no demonstration of support from the CCG. There is no public or patient support, and the clinical basis is very weak. You taking away a service which is used and valued by the local population. Well of course you are reducing choice.'

Other pledges discussed in the document included: ‘stopping the top-down reorganisations of the NHS that have got in the way of patient care’, which the Government claims is being met ‘through measures contained within the Health and Social Care Act’; and a pledge to renegotiate the GP contract ‘and incentivise ways of improving access to primary care in disadvantaged areas’.

Other election pledges for which progress was outlined included the rollout of NHS 111, clinical commissioning, the founding of the NHS Commissioning Board, rolling out the friends and family test, online access to health records by patients and stopping foreign healthcare professionals from working in the NHS unless they speak English ‘properly’.

It revises a statement made in the Mid-Term Review on Monday that practice boundaries have been abolished in six pilot areas, admitting that a boycott of the programme by GP practices in NHS City and Hackney and Tower Hamlets meant it had failed to get off the ground in those areas.

A Cabinet Office spokesperson said: ‘The Programme for Government Update Document published yesterday provides a summary - or snapshot - on the progress that has been made so far in implementing the commitments in the Programme for Government.’

‘In response to whether or not pledges have been “met, failed or ousted,” this is not a score card - it sets out progress against each pledge.’


Readers' comments (2)

  • There are other interesting things in the Coalition Agreement (what - if any - relationship did it bear to the election manifestos of the two parties, on which the individual MPs were elected?): it refers specifically to PCTs as part of the Coalition plan.
    "We will ensure that there is a stronger voice for patients locally through directly elected individuals on the boards of their local primary care trust (PCT)." and "The local PCT will act as a champion for patients and commission those residual services that are best undertaken at a wider level, rather than directly by GPs.".
    Someone remind me of the date Andrew Lansley unveiled the Conservative Party's long held plans for top-down reform of the NHS?
    I'm not sure *why* they bother any more to claim they *are* observing either manifesto or coalition pledges: as they so obviously haven't - and possibly never intended to - observe them, wouldn't it be better just to forget them altogether?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This site is excellent and so is how the subject matter was explained. I also like some of the comments too.Positive site, where did u come up with the information on this posting?I have read a few of the articles on your website now, and I really like your style. Thanks a million and please keep up the effective work.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say